Section 60 of the Patents Act, 1970
Applications for restoration of lapsed patents
Section 60 lets a patentee apply to restore a patent that lapsed for unpaid renewal fees, within eighteen months of the lapse.
Official legal text
The verbatim statutory text of this provision is reproduced from the official source and checked by our legal reviewer before it is published here. Until that check is complete for this page, read the exact wording directly from the official source linked below — it is the only version that governs.
Read this as a plain-language summary. If it and the official text, or a relevant Gazette notification, say different things, the official text and the notification are what count.
What this section says, in plain language
A patent that ceases because a renewal fee was missed is not gone forever. Section 60 gives the patentee a second chance. Where a patent has ceased to have effect by reason of failure to pay a renewal fee within the prescribed period, including any extension allowed, the patentee or his legal representative may apply to the Controller for restoration of the patent.
The application must be made within eighteen months from the date on which the patent ceased to have effect. That period is not extendable in the way ordinary procedural time limits sometimes are, so it is the single most important date to track after a lapse. Where the patent was held by two or more persons jointly, an application may be made by one or more of them with the leave of the Controller, so one absent co-owner does not block the rescue.
The substance of the application is an explanation. It must contain a statement, verified as the Rules require, fully setting out the circumstances that led to the failure to pay. The Controller then considers whether a prima facie case for restoration has been made out. The test the Act applies is whether the failure to pay was unintentional and whether there has been any undue delay in making the application. Genuine administrative failure, a missed communication from an agent, illness, or a company that lost track of a docket during a change of management can all be explained; a deliberate decision to abandon the patent that the owner later regrets cannot.
If a prima facie case is not made out, the Controller notifies the applicant, who may request a hearing before the matter is refused. If a prima facie case is made out, the application is published, which opens the door to opposition by interested persons. What happens after publication is governed by Section 61, and the rights of third parties who acted while the patent was dead are governed by Section 62.
Rule 84 prescribes the form and manner of the application and Rule 86 deals with payment of the unpaid renewal fees. The application is made on Form 15 with the fee prescribed in the First Schedule. Restoration is not automatic and is not cheap once arrears and additional fees are added, which is why paying renewals on time remains by far the better plan.
Why this section matters
Patentees who have missed a renewal payment, legal representatives of deceased patentees, licensees whose licence depends on the patent, and competitors who noticed the lapse.
As soon as a lapse is discovered, and in any event within eighteen months of the patent ceasing to have effect.
A right to apply for restoration on proof that the failure was unintentional and without undue delay, subject to opposition and to third-party protection.
The eighteen-month window closes and the invention stays in the public domain permanently, with no further remedy.
How it works in practice
A lapse discovered during due diligence
Kestrel Robotics Pvt Ltd changes its patent agent during a funding round. In the handover, the renewal instruction for one Indian patent is never passed on. The renewal fee is missed, the six-month extension window passes unnoticed, and the patent ceases to have effect in June. Eleven months later an investor's diligence team flags the lapse. Kestrel acts immediately. Its new agent files an application for restoration on Form 15 under Section 60 with a verified statement setting out the agent handover, the docketing gap, the date the lapse was discovered and the steps taken since. The Controller finds a prima facie case that the failure was unintentional and that there has been no undue delay, and publishes the application. No opposition is filed. On payment of the unpaid renewal fees and the additional fee, the patent is restored, with the protection Section 62 gives to a distributor who had already started sourcing a competing unit during the lapse period.
Simplified illustration only. Actual legal outcomes depend on the facts.
Key points to remember
- Restoration is available only where the patent ceased because a renewal fee was not paid in time.
- The application must be made within eighteen months from the date the patent ceased to have effect.
- The applicant must be the patentee or his legal representative; joint owners may apply with the Controller's leave.
- A verified statement fully explaining the circumstances of the failure is required.
- The Controller must be satisfied that the failure was unintentional and that there was no undue delay.
- If a prima facie case is made out the application is published and may be opposed under Section 61.
- Form 15 under Rule 84 is used, with the fee prescribed in the First Schedule.
Common mistakes and misunderstandings
- Waiting to see whether the patent still has commercial value before applying. The eighteen-month period runs from the date the patent ceased, not from the date the owner decides it matters.
- Filing a vague explanation. The Controller needs a full account of what happened, when it was discovered, and why the delay since then is not undue.
- Assuming restoration wipes the slate clean. Section 62 gives protection to people who began working the invention while the patent was not in force.
- Confusing this with an extension of time to pay a renewal fee, which is a different and much simpler request made before the patent ceases.
Connected provisions
You will find the related rules grouped below rather than inside the explanation. The separation is deliberate. The Act and the Rules are distinct legal instruments, and mixing them can lead a reader to attribute a procedural requirement to the statute itself.
Forms, deadlines and fees
Prescribed forms sit in the Second Schedule to the Patents Rules. The Schedule is updated along with the Rules, so the safe practice is to download the form on the day you prepare it and check that it is the current version.
- An application for restoration must be made within eighteen months from the date on which the patent ceased to have effect.
- Unpaid renewal fees and any additional fee must be paid as directed before restoration takes effect.
Open the deadline calculator — and have every date confirmed against the current Rules before you rely on it.
This site does not carry a fee table. The First Schedule to the Patents Rules is the source, the rates vary with the applicant's category and with the mode of filing, and a figure quoted second-hand goes out of date quietly. How Indian patent fees work.
Related judgments
Court decisions shape how this provision is applied, but a summary is useful only if it is right. Every case note on this site is read by a legal reviewer before it goes live, and none has been completed for this provision so far. This section will fill in as those reviews finish. How case notes are prepared.
Questions people ask about Section 60
Can a lapsed Indian patent be restored?
Yes, where the patent ceased to have effect because a renewal fee was not paid within the prescribed period and any extension. The patentee or his legal representative may apply to the Controller for restoration within eighteen months from the date the patent ceased. The application must fully explain the circumstances of the failure. The Controller has to be satisfied that the failure to pay was unintentional and that there has been no undue delay in applying, and interested persons may oppose the restoration.
How long do I have to apply for restoration?
Eighteen months from the date on which the patent ceased to have effect. This is a statutory period and the practical position is that it should be treated as absolute. The date the patent ceased, not the date you discovered the problem, starts the clock. If you find a lapse in an old portfolio, the first step is to calculate that date precisely from the renewal history, because it determines whether restoration is even available before any question of merits arises.
What counts as an unintentional failure to pay?
The Controller looks for an honest account of what went wrong. A docketing error, a change of agent where instructions were not transferred, a returned or missed communication, serious illness of the person responsible, or a corporate reorganisation that disrupted records are the kinds of circumstances that are put forward. What does not work is a considered decision to let the patent go, followed later by a change of mind because the technology became valuable. The statement must be verified, so accuracy matters.
Does restoration give back full rights?
Not entirely. Section 62 places conditions on a restored patent. No infringement suit may be brought for anything done between the date the patent ceased and the date the restoration application was published. Where a person began in good faith to work the invention, or made definite arrangements to do so, during that period, the restoration order provides protection for them to continue. So restoration recovers the patent going forward but cannot undo what happened while it was not in force.
Has one of your patents lapsed for non-payment?
MYCrave Consultancy prepares restoration applications under Section 60, including the verified statement the Controller expects.
You will be speaking with MYCrave Consultancy & Services, the firm that operates this platform. General questions are answered free; matter‑specific work is quoted before anything is done.